Gary Shteyngart's essay explores his complex relationship with clothing, particularly a meticulously crafted, expensive suit. He details the suit's creation and its impact on his self-perception, weaving this narrative with reflections on aging, social anxiety, and the desire for external validation. While the suit initially provides a sense of confidence and belonging, it ultimately fails to truly address his deeper insecurities. He grapples with the superficiality of material possessions and the fleeting nature of the satisfaction they provide, eventually concluding that true self-acceptance must come from within, not from a perfectly tailored garment.
OAuth2 is a delegation protocol that lets a user grant a third-party application limited access to their resources on a server, without sharing their credentials. Instead of handing over your username and password directly to the app, you authorize it through the resource server (like Google or Facebook). This authorization process generates an access token, which the app then uses to access specific resources on your behalf, within the scope you've permitted. OAuth2 focuses solely on authorization and not authentication, meaning it doesn't verify the user's identity. It relies on other mechanisms, like OpenID Connect, for that purpose.
HN commenters generally praised the article for its clear explanation of OAuth2, calling it accessible and well-written, particularly appreciating the focus on the "why" rather than just the "how." Some users pointed out potential minor inaccuracies or areas for further clarification, such as the distinction between authorization code grant with PKCE and implicit flow for client-side apps, the role of refresh tokens, and the implications of using a third-party identity provider. One commenter highlighted the difficulty of finding good OAuth2 resources and expressed gratitude for the article's contribution. Others suggested additional topics for the author to cover, such as the challenges of cross-domain authentication. Several commenters also shared personal anecdotes about their experiences implementing or troubleshooting OAuth2.
The blog post argues that atproto offers a superior approach to online identity compared to existing centralized platforms. It emphasizes atproto's decentralized nature, enabling users to own their data and choose where it's stored, unlike platforms like Twitter where users are locked in. This ownership extends to usernames, which become portable across different atproto servers, preventing platform-specific lock-in and fostering a more federated social web. The post highlights the importance of cryptographic verification, allowing users to prove ownership of their identity and content across the decentralized network. This framework, the post concludes, establishes a stronger foundation for digital identity, giving users genuine control and portability.
Hacker News users discussed the implications of atproto, a decentralized social networking protocol, for identity ownership. Several commenters expressed skepticism about true decentralization, pointing out the potential for centralized control by Bluesky, the primary developers of atproto. Concerns were raised about Bluesky's venture capital funding and the possibility of future monetization strategies compromising the open nature of the protocol. Others questioned the practicality of user-hosted servers and the technical challenges of maintaining a truly distributed network. Some saw atproto as a positive step towards reclaiming online identity, while others remained unconvinced, viewing it as another iteration of existing social media platforms with similar centralization risks. The discussion also touched upon the complexities of content moderation and the potential for abuse in a decentralized environment. A few commenters highlighted the need for clear governance and community involvement to ensure atproto's success as a truly decentralized and user-owned social network.
Summary of Comments ( 53 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42989062
HN commenters largely found Shteyngart's essay on bespoke suits self-indulgent and out of touch. Several criticized the focus on expensive clothing amidst widespread economic hardship, viewing it as tone-deaf and privileged. Some questioned the value proposition of bespoke tailoring, suggesting cheaper off-the-rack options suffice. Others, while acknowledging the potential artistry and personal satisfaction derived from bespoke suits, still found the essay's framing excessive and lacking self-awareness. A few commenters offered a more nuanced perspective, suggesting the essay satirized consumerism and explored themes of identity and self-perception. However, this interpretation was a minority view, with most finding the piece shallow and disconnected from the realities of most people's lives.
The Hacker News post titled "The Man in the Midnight-Blue Six-Ply Italian-Milled Wool Suit" linking to an Atlantic article about Gary Shteyngart's experience with bespoke tailoring has generated a moderate number of comments, mostly focusing on the perceived absurdity of the situation and the author's apparent self-absorption.
Several commenters express skepticism and mild mockery towards the author's quest for the perfect suit, viewing it as an extravagant and ultimately futile exercise in vanity. They question the value proposition of spending such a significant amount of money on clothing, especially when the described benefits seem superficial and driven by insecurity. One commenter sarcastically highlights the supposed transformative power of the suit, implying that the author believes it will magically solve his problems.
Others discuss the nature of bespoke tailoring itself, contrasting the genuine craftsmanship and personalized fit offered by traditional bespoke with the more common "made-to-measure" services often misrepresented as bespoke. They emphasize the significant price difference and the level of skill involved in true bespoke tailoring. This discussion touches upon the idea that the author might be mistaking a high-end made-to-measure suit for a truly bespoke one.
A few commenters offer more empathetic perspectives, acknowledging the potential psychological benefits of investing in well-made clothing and the confidence it can provide. They suggest that while the author's pursuit might seem excessive to some, it's ultimately a personal choice and shouldn't be judged too harshly. However, even these comments maintain a slightly ironic tone, recognizing the inherent humor in the author's obsession.
There's a brief tangent about the changing landscape of men's fashion and the decline of formal attire in contemporary society. This leads to a discussion about the role of clothing in self-expression and the different ways people choose to present themselves to the world.
Overall, the comments on the Hacker News post are a mix of amusement, skepticism, and mild criticism towards the author's extravagant pursuit of sartorial perfection. While some commenters attempt to understand the underlying motivations, the prevailing sentiment is one of gentle mockery and a questioning of the value placed on such material possessions. The discussion also delves into the nuances of bespoke tailoring and the broader context of men's fashion in the 21st century.